With the impending speech to congress this March 3 by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, I respectfully submit one of your constituent’s opinions regarding this presentation. I hope you’ll entertain a small morsel of levity in my following introduction, but in all fairness this is a letter of serious context.

In my twenties and thirties I served in combat for the U.S. Navy, and at that time in my life I was a diehard supporter of Israel…probably due to the immense pro-Israel propaganda forged into our minds. Now, with a few more decades under my belt, I see three things which impress me even more about their country:

They know how to build large-scale walls that separate people! And better yet, they don’t let any politics stop them from building them…not even when international law and U.N. resolutions condemn them for it (e.g. the wall with three control gates around the “little town of Bethlehem” that create virtual prisons for some of their citizens). Our congress should learn from their expertise on how to build similar walls on our southern border to control the flow of illegal immigrants.

Israel, despite pressure from the Hebrew Immigration Aid Society (an American organization, who’s motto is “Welcome the stranger, Protect the refugee”), has resisted taking in immigrants of the refugee type seeking asylum, even when they are destitute. To quote the HIAS website: “the government continues its efforts to stem the flow of asylum seekers, and to encourage those in the country to leave. One of the most significant steps Israel took was to build a fence along the Sinai border. Following completion of the fence, unauthorized entries have dropped dramatically: in all of 2013, fewer than 50 people entered Israel without permission. The government also compensates for those who choose to leave voluntarily with $3,500, though where they are meant to go is unclear.” That’s right, just 50 illegal immigrants! And HIAS is very successful in the United States. But in Israel, Palestinians who may have grown up in the territory and ultimately forced out by war or terror can be refused the right-of-return under law. And at the same time a resident of New York City with no legal attachment to the land of Israel, but with Jewish blood, can enter Israel and obtain easy citizenship with rabbi certification. This makes it clear that Israel is in total control of the real immigration that takes place in their country, and they don’t let lobby organizations sway them from their policy. This is impressive. Can we exercise the same control?

My third positive observation of Israel is that Israeli leaders stick up for their Jewish people. They even insist on calling their nation “The Jewish State”. However, the Majority in America, white descendants of our forefather’s who founded the United States, has been whittled down from about 90% to less than 70% of the demographics. Their voice has been greatly diminished, if not totally marginalized. Our government seems to lean persistently towards minority interests, while individuals and groups with traditionalist views are demonized with calumny and denigrating epithets. Our country rejected the ideal of maintaining homogeneity in American demographics by repealing the Immigration Act of 1924 and replacing it with the Open Immigration Act of 1965 under the lead of Senator Jacob Javits. However, in Israel there are countless public and private groups, like Lehava and Birthright Israel, which support strong Jewish identity and fight assimilation. Zionism, itself, is a movement designed to protect the homogeneity of the Jewish people.

The three strong points I make for Israel are inversely treated by our government on our soil. Yet, there is overwhelming evidence that shows that the same main lobbying force, the Jewish community, is at work. Double standards between their activism for Israel and the U.S. suggest that duplicity is at play. And so I can’t help but evoke President George Washington’s advice in his 1796 Farewell Address on the dangers to our nation with foreign entanglements (please find his pertinent excerpt at the end of this letter). Should it not be prudent for our congress and government offices to heed such advice from the leader of our Founding Fathers? Prime Minister Netanyahu represents the political crown of Jewish power in the world. Is it appropriate to offer such political access and deference (as the exclusive right to address congress) to a foreign leader who’s influence already trumps any other paleoconservative lobby forces and movements which strive to protect our national interests? The multifold of organizations aimed at protecting Jewish interests already enjoy huge influence due to their deep coffers of funding. They include, but are not limited to:

The Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations (which was a product of President Eisenhower’s already being overwhelmed by too many Jewish interest groups, and represents over 50 organizations);

AIPAC (The American Israel Public Affairs Committee) which, as a Congressman, I am sure you are quite familiar with;

The ADL, which has led the campaign against free speech in America by initiating “hate speech” laws in Congress;

Hasbara Fellowships (which further extend political activism for Jewish interests into the campuses of our universities and the internet);

Jewish Americans represented as “Communities in Focus” by the White House.

Netanyahu’s speech would appear to me to be overkill to the existing abundance of Jewish influence in our society. Of course, I am not telling you anything you don’t already know as a politician. But I am trying to reach out to you not only as your constituent, but as a veteran who’s lost many shipmates during his service, and who honors the oath he took to help protect his nation and defend the Constitution. I bare no enmity for the group I have referred to, or any other races, ethnicities, and special-interest groups. Bigotry is not my game, and I have devoted over five decades of my life treating all peoples with respect, dignity and kindness. But for Pete’s sake, with the way foreign and domestic policies have been shifting the past fifty years, one has to start questioning whose interests our government is working for, and what country our soldiers are defending?

Unusual to most Americans, though, my Estonian great-grandfather was thrown into slavery by the Bolshevik forces of the early 20th century. He was sent to the “Gulag” of Siberia and labored in a salt mine. I also lost one grandfather to the horrific killings of the Soviet Army (after the WWII armistice), while my other grandfather was conscripted into the same Soviet Army under gunpoint, and kept out of my life as a captive behind the Iron Curtain. Were my ancestors victims? Yes. Did anyone in my family receive reparations or payments? No, and efforts to regain the property rights of the farms my relatives owned would be ridiculous. Are there museums in America that focus on losses of these foreigners like my European ancestors? No.

People of all ethnicities and races have suffered throughout recent times, but given the political power of the group in focus here, the idea that one people has suffered and been persecuted more than any other in history has been constantly promoted. And it is their interests that shall prevail over everyone else’s.

My family’s tragic history, on the other hand, warns me of a powerful Marxist movement that dominated many societies and brought about the demise of tens of millions of people. It is very odd that the American public is taught very little about the roots of Marxism and Communism even after the Soviet Union has been dismantled. If one studies the history and patterns of it they may find variants of this same insidious ideology lurking in our very backyards. This should encourage our government officials to always be on guard.

So if it’s not enough that one ethnic group owns or controls all key positions that matter in the policies, functions and cultural direction of our nation, their wealthy organizations like the ADL and SPLC are notorious for attacking and stifling individuals who simply wish to have free association with groups that represent interests contrary to their liking. Case in point is where the House Majority Whip Steve Scalise was recently assailed in the mainstream media for attending a European-American Unity and Rights Association meeting (EURO). Shouldn’t this congressman have not only the right, but the duty, to listen to a variety of opinions across the board of his constituency without getting smeared? Would he have been smeared if he attended an NAACP or La Raza (“the Race”) meeting? No. Clearly there is a problem here, and at this rate America may become the antithesis of what it claims to stand for. Two aspects of this have been the strong (Jewish led) push for hate speech laws that will turn any constructive criticism into jail time if made against the interests of their powerful groups, and the other is the massive immigration of non-Europeans that can transform the U.S.A. into a third world country.

The Majority in America will soon enough be a minority if present trends continue. If our great nation is to survive in anything close to the vision of the European-Americans that formed it, then we will need congressmen like you to show profound inner strength. What is needed most by you and your peers is the moral courage to stand up and unite together in a way that will set a new course…one where today’s European-Americans and all ethnicities have an equal voice as any minority group present. How that can be accomplished will be difficult, but I have some ideas:

In promoting our country as a “true multicultural society”, create Federal governance that will allow unique cultural/ethnic/racial media industries to exist in our society without interference in any way by the current ethno-monopolized Hollywood/TV/Newspaper/Publishing industry. Yes, it is a form of separateness. But only this framework will permit the independent creative forces of different ethnicities to survive in their unique cultural expression and based on their own values. Wouldn’t this be the best way to display the strengths of diversity? As it stands today, most mainstream media giants, like Disney and CNN, have been taken over by the same small ethnic minority. Can it even be argued that this media is getting more degenerate every year, while wholesome “profanity/obscenity-free” programming is harder and harder to find? (See, e.g., “Dirty Jews and the Christian Right, Brilliant actors like Larry David and Sarah Silverman are challenging America’s powerful religious, family-friendly culture and asserting their Jewishness by glorifying obscenity,” Haaretz, Feb. 10, 2014.)

It’s time to form a caucus for European-Americans in congress. Our children are already a minority among their classmates, and reverse-discrimination is in high gear. Somewhat related is where white college applicants, who represent over 60% of the total, are receiving approximately 20% of the slots at elite schools like Harvard, while Jewish students have filled 25% of the seats, a marked over-representation based on merit and likely a form of racial preference and discrimination that this country should keep an eye on (see “The myth of American meritocracy: How corrupt are Ivy League admissions?” by Roy Unz). Graduates of these Ivy League schools go to high places in our government. We should have the same right to organize as the minorities.

Campaign financing has got to come down to the level where election candidates at all levels of income and financial backing can compete equally. Utilizing the public broadcast service, PBS, Federally sponsored websites, and other creative ways could allow equal access for candidates to promote their platforms and debate. The time has come where we shouldn’t allow mainstream media, with its own special interests and nasty commercials, to determine who’s permitted to play in major politics. Indeed, it’s embarrassing and childish to see how the system works today with negative ads. A move towards real campaign finance reform will point us closer to a true democracy.

Dual citizenship laws should be revised so that those who wish to perform the duties of official United States positions (where American interests are above all else) should need to revoke their foreign citizenship. The fact that these decision makers have a bias and allegiance to another country is dangerous to our own interests. Along with this, there needs to be strict enforcement on the limits of foreign lobby groups.

Excerpt from President George Washington’s 1796 Farewell Address:

“In the execution of such a plan, nothing is more essential than that permanent, inveterate antipathies against particular nations, and passionate attachments for others, should be excluded; and that, in place of them, just and amicable feelings towards all should be cultivated. The nation which indulges towards another a habitual hatred or a habitual fondness is in some degree a slave. It is a slave to its animosity or to its affection, either of which is sufficient to lead it astray from its duty and its interest. Antipathy in one nation against another disposes each more readily to offer insult and injury, to lay hold of slight causes of umbrage, and to be haughty and intractable, when accidental or trifling occasions of dispute occur. Hence, frequent collisions, obstinate, envenomed, and bloody contests. The nation, prompted by ill-will and resentment, sometimes impels to war the government, contrary to the best calculations of policy. The government sometimes participates in the national propensity, and adopts through passion what reason would reject; at other times it makes the animosity of the nation subservient to projects of hostility instigated by pride, ambition, and other sinister and pernicious motives. The peace often, sometimes perhaps the liberty, of nations, has been the victim.

So likewise, a passionate attachment of one nation for another produces a variety of evils. Sympathy for the favorite nation, facilitating the illusion of an imaginary common interest in cases where no real common interest exists, and infusing into one the enmities of the other, betrays the former into a participation in the quarrels and wars of the latter without adequate inducement or justification. It leads also to concessions to the favorite nation of privileges denied to others which is apt doubly to injure the nation making the concessions; by unnecessarily parting with what ought to have been retained, and by exciting jealousy, ill-will, and a disposition to retaliate, in the parties from whom equal privileges are withheld. And it gives to ambitious, corrupted, or deluded citizens (who devote themselves to the favorite nation), facility to betray or sacrifice the interests of their own country, without odium, sometimes even with popularity; gilding, with the appearances of a virtuous sense of obligation, a commendable deference for public opinion, or a laudable zeal for public good, the base or foolish compliances of ambition, corruption, or infatuation.”

So at the end of the day, Congressman, who will play a more decisive roll in your motivation and decision making, George Washington or Benjamin Netanyahu? Please heed the advice of our most important President and build a coalition that will focus on limiting our foreign influences and strengthening our core people and values, or we just may find ourselves beholden to Israel.

Yours Truly,

A Constituent

Share this entry

https://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/TOO-Full-Logo-660x156-1.png00Eric Kunnaphttps://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/TOO-Full-Logo-660x156-1.pngEric Kunnap2015-02-25 10:37:082015-02-25 12:59:59Letter from a reader to his Congressman